Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That is a very deceptive video/article (at least the first half above the paywall). It is true that a few of these sats will have to come down each day, but the video is of a booster failure/explosion, not a normal planned obsolescence sat re-entry.

And re-entry is part of the cleanup plan. All satellites responsibly launched need a plan to deal with possible orbital waste. By decommissioning in this way, we're reducing overall impact of the constellation.

Given the immense possible good worldwide internet can provide, and the virtuous cycle it creates for the US launch industry, it's really hard to take these claims seriously.



> the immense possible good worldwide internet

It's hard to take your argument seriously if you think that's more important than preserving the environment


It is impossible to make any improvement without some impact. We're way, way past any real problems when discussing a few 100kg of metal falling into the upper atmosphere every day.


> hard to take your argument seriously if you think that's more important than preserving the environment

Okay, go convince a few billion Indians and Chinese they should wait to industrialize because the environment can’t take it.


What does this have to do with anything ITT?


> What does this have to do with anything ITT?

Growth versus preservation. India is trashing its air quality burning coal near its cities. Yet that power is lifting millions out of poverty and into the world's second-largest middle class.

Everyone would prefer clean air ceteris paribus. But for a lot of those people, economic security is "more important than preserving the environment."


I believe that an atmosphere compatible with human life is a bit more useful than internet by satelite. The fact that the impact of re-entry of satelites is absolute insane. Any good engineering company would study the whole impact of scaling up before doing so. The fact that spacex didn't do that is really worrying and regulation should come to stop what they are doing asap until the impact is better understood. Some more serious engineers at Japan aerospace are studying wooden satelite which is a quite approach to the problem.


I am not aware of threats to the atmosphere from the entry at a 100kg/day scale. And nobody is. At this point risks are hypothetical to the ozone or other layers.


if the aersols do cause any problems we're done for quite a while as they do not seem to come down. As I understand it the amount of aerosol will be quite significant in this layer of athmosphere. https://csl.noaa.gov/news/2025/427_0428.html


I'm aware of the threats to the atmosphere from repeated and frequent rocket launches.


> I'm aware of the threats to the atmosphere from repeated and frequent rocket launches

Educate us on how methalox rockets are a significant environmental concern?


> And re-entry is part of the cleanup plan

Polluting the upper atmosphere with copper, aluminium and other compounds with unknown consequences is hardly a cleanup plan


if you combine all the fallen starlink satellites and the debris/waste they produce in a year, it comes down to about less than 0.1% of what the earth receives from space in the same year


Is that true? I recall seeing a 16% or so number for the increase in mass burning up in the atmosphere.

Edit: I can’t find a source for any number for the increase. If you know could you share one?

Ah nevermind this seems solid https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02731...



Okay, that makes sense. The reading I did indicated that the composition of the man-made mass is very different, and could greatly elevate the amount of certain elements released in the upper atmosphere, like aluminum. Is this not cause for concern?


I think the answer is "nobody knows"


Meteorites are a thing, you know.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: